New 2.4L version for linux x86_64!!!

[sunu]

I just spotted a new version of optimized apps for Linux x86_64 at Crunch3r's  page http://calbe.dw70.de/seti.html

A quick note though. If you copy the new files over the old ones, all your already downloaded workunits will be errored out. You need to modify your app_info.xml file accordingly as per Richard Haselgrove's post here http://setiathome.berkeley.edu//forum_thread.php?id=31810&nowrap=true#627698

If you have the previous 2.4 version, it should be something like this:

<app_info>

    <app>

        <name>setiathome_enhanced</name>

    </app>

    <file_info>

        <name>setiathome-5.15.x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu</name>

        <executable/>

    </file_info>

    <app_version>

        <app_name>setiathome_enhanced</app_name>

        <version_num>521</version_num>

        <file_ref>

            <file_name>setiathome-5.15.x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu</file_name>

            <main_program/>

        </file_ref>

    </app_version>

    <app_version>

        <app_name>setiathome_enhanced</app_name>

        <version_num>528</version_num>

        <file_ref>

           <file_name>setiathome-5.15.x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu</file_name>

            <main_program/>

        </file_ref>

    </app_version>

</app_info>

[Rok]

Wonder what kind of speed enhancements this gets...
My A64 2.7ghz cpu running x86_64 Suse 10.2 nearly gets beat by a Athlon XP 2600 running windows XP..

heck.. a Pentium D running at 3.2 ghz on Xp is almost twice as fast as my A64.

here is a WU where a P4 2.8ghz (using SSE1) beats my A64.  Blegh..

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/workunit.php?wuid=155290966

Anybody getting similar results from the x86_64 clients? I expected it to be on par with 32bit versions.. but wow.. its slower..

[Crunch3r]

Wonder what kind of speed enhancements this gets...
My A64 2.7ghz cpu running x86_64 Suse 10.2 nearly gets beat by a Athlon XP 2600 running windows XP..

Things should look a bit better with the 2.4L version now. However 2.4L might not be the last release for x64

heck.. a Pentium D running at 3.2 ghz on Xp is almost twice as fast as my A64.

Of course it is faster. A Pentium D has 2048 kb L2 cache per core and your A64 only 512 kb.

[Rok]

But my A64 smokes a 3+ ghz Pent D on Windows XP 32!

I am running your 32bit version, and it seems faster. I am now getting scores on par with non optimized Core2s running Berkeleys 32 bit version.

With Berkeley purging completed WU faster these days, its harder to keep track. Do you have any way of benchmarking on Linux? I saw where Astro had benchmarked different AR wus on XP et al, but nothing in Linux land.

[sunu]

Do you have any way of benchmarking on Linux? I saw where Astro had benchmarked different AR wus on XP et al, but nothing in Linux land.

I have a Q6600 running Ubuntu 7.04 64bit. Checking a sample of completed workunits I beat every processor with non-optimized clients and processors with optimized clients up to Core 2 Duos with comparable speed (2.4 Ghz).

There are exceptions to the above (the second statement about optimized clients) but are rare, especially lower Core 2 Duos highly overclocked (above 3 Ghz).

I'm now using the new 2.4L 64bit client and I have a feeling that it is a little faster than the previous 2.4 client. I don't have hard numbers, but I think there is a real speed improvement.

However 2.4L might not be the last release for x64

Way to go, man!!!

Keep up the good work!

[Rok]

I am running the 64 bit version now, and it seems to at least be on par or a little faster than the 32bit optimized.

Without any real way to benchmark, we really dont have anything to go off of other than "percieved" speed-ups.

I have a C2Q 6600 due in the next few days. I cant wait to fire it up, get it to at least 3gh+ and fire up Seti on It..

I am still debating XP32 or XP64 on it though.

Once my QuadFX gets back from RMA, It will have x86_64 linux on it as well.. hoping to see some good speeds coming from 4 x 3ghz cores.

[Raistmer]

Without any real way to benchmark, we really dont have anything to go off of other than "percieved" speed-ups.

You could run linux version of knabench (downloadable from this site).
It's very interesting to compare linux & windows versions on the same host...

[michael37]

I will try that too as my laptop dual-boots into 64-bit Ubuntu and 32-bit Windows Vista.  So, no 64-bit Windows apps for the time being, but should give us idea.

[Ned Slider]

I have a Q6600, dual booting WinXP Pro and RHEL5 x86-64. So far I've tried the 32-bit Windows client (Simon, 2.4) and on Linux I've tried the 64-bit 2.4 (Simon) and 2.4L (Crunch3r), and I can't see any noticeable difference between them comparing times for batches of similar WUs.

About the only thing I've yet to try is a 32-bit Linux client on my RHEL5 x86-64.